A member of the public can find clear instructions on the website, book an appointment and be treated properly at the counter. Or they may encounter inconsistencies, contradictory information and unexplained delays. This ‘Mystery Public Italia’ guide starts here: with the gap – often invisible to those at the top – between the service designed by the organisation and the one actually experienced by the public.
For a public administration, measuring the user experience does not simply mean checking for formal compliance with procedures. It means understanding whether a member of the public can find their way around, whether they receive clear guidance, whether they are treated with care, and whether the chosen channel – in person, by telephone or online – delivers on its service promise. It is an operational assessment, useful for identifying where to take action and in what order of priority.
What is Mystery Public?
Mystery Public applies the mystery shopping methodology to public services. A trained assessor presents themselves as a normal user, following a scenario defined during the planning phase: requesting information, booking a service, submitting an application, seeking assistance with a procedure or using a digital channel.
The observation is structured. It is not based on general impressions, but on indicators linked to the organisation’s standards and the citizen’s specific expectations. Response times, clarity of language, guidance provided, accessibility, accuracy of information, handling of waiting times and the quality of the interaction all become comparable data points.
The difference compared to a satisfaction questionnaire is substantial. The questionnaire gathers the perceptions of those who have already used the service, with all the variety of personal circumstances that this entails. Mystery Public, on the other hand, assesses a specific, repeatable and documented experience. The two sources are not interchangeable: together, they allow us to see both what users feel and what actually happens at the points of contact.
Guide to Mystery Public in Italy: what to assess
Every public authority has different services, audiences and constraints. For this reason, an effective survey cannot use the same checklist for everyone. The starting point is the user journey map: where the need arises, which channel is used, which steps may cause uncertainty and how the interaction ends.
The service desk and reception
The service desk remains crucial for many services, especially when the procedure is complex or the user needs support. The assessment is not just about the staff’s courtesy. It is necessary to observe the signage, how easy it is to locate the correct service, how queues are managed, the confidentiality of conversations, and the ability to explain documents, requirements and next steps without unnecessary technical jargon.
A member of staff may provide information that is technically correct but of little practical use if they do not check that the person they are speaking to has understood what to do. This is one of the most important points: public service is effective when it enables the person to move forward, not when it simply conveys a rule.
Telephone, email and support channels
The relationship with the organisation often begins before the customer physically visits the office. An unanswered call, a generic email or an unclear referral can lead to further visits to the counter, complaints and a loss of trust. The Mystery Public can assess accessibility, response times, the comprehensiveness of replies, consistency amongst staff, and the ability to direct the member of the public to the most appropriate channel.
In this context, it is also useful to measure the quality of language. Administrative communications must be precise, but precision and clarity are not mutually exclusive. An effective response explains what is required, by when, where to find the information and what solution to adopt should a problem arise.
Website, bookings and digital services
Digitalisation has raised users’ expectations. An online service is not judged solely on its availability, but on its actual ease of use: can the citizen find the right page? Do they understand the requirements? Can they complete the procedure on a mobile device? Do they receive a clear confirmation?
A mystery audit of web channels examines the entire journey, not just the final screen. It can highlight unclear forms, out-of-date pages, instructions that contradict those given at the counter, or obstacles that force the user to start again. Digital services really work when they reduce steps and uncertainty, not when they shift the complexity onto the citizen.
Accessibility and inclusion
The experience is not the same for everyone. Age, digital literacy, language, vulnerable circumstances and disabilities can turn a seemingly simple process into a barrier. Testing scenarios must therefore represent realistic situations relevant to the service being assessed.
There is no need to simulate every possible scenario in a single study. Instead, the most significant cases should be selected, the points to be observed should be carefully defined, and an assessment made as to whether the organisation offers viable alternatives. A booking system, for example, should also be checked for clear instructions and practical support for those who are unable to complete the process independently.
How to design a useful survey
A Mystery Public project delivers value when the research questions are clear before the survey takes place. The aim should not be to ‘monitor staff’, but to verify consistency between stated standards, the organisation of the service and the citizen’s actual experience.
The set-up phase requires consultation with those responsible for service delivery, quality assurance, communications and, where necessary, digital systems. It is necessary to define the scenarios, select the locations or channels, establish the survey period and translate the standards into observable behaviours. ‘Being helpful’ is a laudable principle, but it is not an indicator: actions such as greeting the customer, listening to their request, checking that they have understood and explaining the next step are what constitute indicators.
The profile of the mystery client also warrants attention. In a public service, the credibility of the scenario and the ability to observe have a direct impact on the quality of the data. Investigators must be trained to distinguish between facts, timing, relevant statements and assessments, reporting the experience in a comprehensive and verifiable manner.
Information management also requires rigour. Data must be checked, consistent with the scenario, and reported in accordance with organisational requirements and confidentiality. A two-tier verification process for findings helps to avoid hasty judgements and ensures the reliability of the results on which decisions will be based.
From scores to improvement actions
A report full of percentages is not yet an improvement plan. The most useful part of the analysis lies in linking the results to operational causes: is a long waiting time due to workflow, the distribution of skills, signage or the complexity of the process? Do inconsistent responses stem from missing updates, insufficient training or open-to-interpretation procedures?
Priorities must be set by considering two factors: the impact on the user and the practical feasibility of taking action. Some critical issues require organisational or technological changes. Others can be addressed quickly through updated instructions, micro-training, improved internal communication or simplifying the message to the public.
It is also useful to share the results with front-line teams, adopting a growth-oriented approach. When staff understand which behaviours genuinely facilitate the citizen’s journey, the data becomes a practical tool rather than an abstract judgement. Mystery Man® structures its analyses precisely to transform field observations into actionable insights regarding standards, service delivery and perceived quality.
When to repeat the survey
A single survey is useful for capturing a snapshot of a situation, but it is not enough to measure improvement. The frequency depends on the variability of the service, the number of branches, seasonality and ongoing changes. An organisation introducing a new platform or reorganising its service desks will require more frequent checks than a stable, standardised service.
Repeating surveys under comparable conditions allows you to check whether the actions taken have produced tangible results. Not all indicators need to improve at the same time: the aim is to understand which measures are working, where critical issues persist, and which locations or channels offer practices worth rolling out.
Citizens do not view the organisation as a collection of offices, procedures and platforms. They assess their experience as a whole. For this reason, the most useful question is not merely whether the service complies with regulations, but whether it genuinely enables people to obtain a clear, accurate and accessible response.